Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Judge Left, James M.

ADELANTO — IMMIGRATION COURT

Hearing cases: hearings are scheduled

Last hearing
July 31, 2026
Next hearing
August 3, 2026 · 1,689 scheduled in all
Last decision
August 29, 2025
Now sitting at
LOS ANGELES — IMMIGRATION COURT
Courts worked at: 3

Hearings scheduled here

Worked here before

The periods overlap, and that is not an error: a judge hears cases at a new court while still closing out old ones at the previous one. Each row answers "when did this judge work here", not "from when to when did they serve here".

Status is derived from the court calendar: whether the judge has hearings scheduled after the release cutoff. The EOIR release carries no personnel data, so retirement, removal, elevation to the BIA and extended absence cannot be told apart — only what the data shows is stated here. Hearings are scheduled two to three years out, so an empty calendar for a working judge is rare; for judges who went quiet in the last few months it may still be an artifact of the cutoff, which lags by about a month. The lookup table's "active" flag is not used: it disagrees with the calendar for a third of judges.

20%

Asylum grant rate

of 2,340 decisions · FY2000–FY2025

95% interval: 19%22%

granted:
476
denied:
1,864
How this percentage is calculated
Grant rate = granted / (granted + denied). Administrative closures, withdrawals, abandonment and "not adjudicated" are excluded from the denominator. The unit of count is a decision per proceeding, not per application: applicants almost always file asylum, withholding and CAT protection together. Withholding and CAT grants are counted separately from asylum. U.S. fiscal year: October 1 – September 30.

How this compares

  • This judge20% (2,340)
  • The whole court — ADELANTO — IMMIGRATION COURT17% (7,996)
  • All U.S. courts33% (1,350,724)

This comparison does not adjust for which cases a judge was given: judges see different nationalities, different shares of detained respondents, and different rates of legal representation. A difference in percentages does not by itself mean identical cases were treated differently.

Trend by fiscal year

0%25%50%75%100%201620172019202120232025

U.S. fiscal year: October 1 – September 30.

Years with fewer than 10 decisions are not plotted (5): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY202554423%19%27%
FY202451619%16%23%
FY202319140%34%47%
FY202239316%12%19%
FY2021546%2%15%
FY202015916%11%22%
FY201918426%20%32%
FY201811716%11%24%
FY201714610%6%16%
FY20163116%7%33%
FY201410%0%79%
FY201310%0%79%
FY201210%0%79%
FY200410%0%79%
FY200010%0%79%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
GUATEMALA41213%10%16%
MEXICO3175%3%8%
CHINA31345%39%50%
EL SALVADOR2896%4%10%
COLOMBIA2214%2%8%
HONDURAS1457%4%12%
RUSSIA12650%41%59%
PERU9012%7%21%
CAMEROON5452%39%65%
ARMENIA5153%40%66%
NICARAGUA5016%8%29%
ECUADOR4312%5%24%
HAITI260%0%13%
ERITREA1878%55%91%
CUBA1354%29%77%

How long a case takes

How long it took from service of the NTA to the decision on the application, for the cases this judge has already finished.

12 mo

median

half of cases: 8—24 mo

based on 2,340 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY202554412 mo1115
FY202451611 mo1014
FY202319120 mo1239
FY202239329 mo2334
FY20215428 mo2629
FY20201598 mo613
FY20191845 mo46
FY20181175 mo46
FY20171467 mo611
FY2016316 mo59

Duration runs from the NTA date (charging document served) to the decision on the application. Median, not mean: the distribution has a long right tail. Cases decided this year may have begun a decade ago, so duration by year of decision is not a forecast for a case filed today.

The queue

Cases with no decision yet. A different figure from the duration of completed cases: quick cases leave the queue first, so the long ones accumulate among those still waiting.

No undecided cases in this release.

What became of appeals to the BIA

An immigration judge's decision can be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals. This is what the Board did with those appeals. A high share of reversals and remands tells a different story than a low grant rate alone.

What became of appeals to the BIA
BIA decisionAppeals
Dismiss Appeal/Affirm IJ's Decision914
Remand143
Denied119
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief89
Withdrawal of Appeal83
Summary Affirmance79
Summary Dismissal (G) untimely or waived appeal40
Summarily Dismiss32
Moot Bond29
ROP Returned to Court to correct deficiency25
Terminate-DHS PD20
Termination16
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA14
Sustain8
Background Check Remand6
Grant with no Remand5
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)5
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD2
Other1
Administratively Closed-DHS PD1
Administratively Closed1

Data comes from the monthly EOIR Case Data release (U.S. DOJ FOIA Library). This service is not affiliated with the U.S. government and does not provide legal advice. The data lags by roughly a month; for current case status use ACIS and Respondent Access. The source is known to have missing records, including relief applications — absent data does not mean it is absent from your case.